EmiliaAnn
-
LickHerLovely
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2020 2:15 am
Re: EmiliaAnn
So when you decide to re distribute my content should I be requesting royalty fees from your sales?
Re: EmiliaAnn
Tapioca Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Same tat on ankle tells me otherwise!
But EmiliaAnn does not have a tattoo on her finger or back of hand, it?s not her
-------------------------------------------------------
> Same tat on ankle tells me otherwise!
But EmiliaAnn does not have a tattoo on her finger or back of hand, it?s not her
Re: EmiliaAnn
TC99 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And the Very Obvious Unique Nipples , its her
While I agree that EmiliaAnn has very distinctive nipples, she does not have a tattoo on her finger or on the back of her hand, I?m sorry but it isn?t her
-------------------------------------------------------
> And the Very Obvious Unique Nipples , its her
While I agree that EmiliaAnn has very distinctive nipples, she does not have a tattoo on her finger or on the back of her hand, I?m sorry but it isn?t her
Re: EmiliaAnn
LickHerLovely Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So when you decide to re distribute my content
> should I be requesting royalty fees from your
> sales?
As owner of the OF and the shooter if the content perhaps you could confirm that ?Sonya? is not EmiliaAnn
-------------------------------------------------------
> So when you decide to re distribute my content
> should I be requesting royalty fees from your
> sales?
As owner of the OF and the shooter if the content perhaps you could confirm that ?Sonya? is not EmiliaAnn
-
LickHerLovely
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2020 2:15 am
Re: EmiliaAnn
funboy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LickHerLovely Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > So when you decide to re distribute my content
> > should I be requesting royalty fees from your
> > sales?
>
>
> As owner of the OF and the shooter if the content
> perhaps you could confirm that ?Sonya? is not
> EmiliaAnn
It is my duty to only every refer to any model/performer by what she states on her release form, and only that so no comment will be made. It would be idiotic of me to start giving away any masked models real identity in an open forum.
I do not however, aprreciate the idea that some may purchase content from me in order to redistribute it themselves, especially for money
-------------------------------------------------------
> LickHerLovely Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > So when you decide to re distribute my content
> > should I be requesting royalty fees from your
> > sales?
>
>
> As owner of the OF and the shooter if the content
> perhaps you could confirm that ?Sonya? is not
> EmiliaAnn
It is my duty to only every refer to any model/performer by what she states on her release form, and only that so no comment will be made. It would be idiotic of me to start giving away any masked models real identity in an open forum.
I do not however, aprreciate the idea that some may purchase content from me in order to redistribute it themselves, especially for money
Re: EmiliaAnn and the coming apocalypse
LickHerLovely raises a continuing problem.
If photographers pay models to shoot session material for sale, then viewers start swapping or selling the material cheap, the original photographers are no longer supported in shooting anything new.
So people who swap or re-sell material shoot themselves in the foot, in that eventually no-one will be shooting anything new for them to watch. But by the time that happens, shooting will have long before ground to a halt.
The lesson is - if you want to see continuing material of new models, support the photographers who shoot it, don't swap or re-sell their material.
This message probably come too late though. Already most models would prefer to stay at home on webcam, partly because photographers can't raise enough paid interest in shooting them.
If photographers pay models to shoot session material for sale, then viewers start swapping or selling the material cheap, the original photographers are no longer supported in shooting anything new.
So people who swap or re-sell material shoot themselves in the foot, in that eventually no-one will be shooting anything new for them to watch. But by the time that happens, shooting will have long before ground to a halt.
The lesson is - if you want to see continuing material of new models, support the photographers who shoot it, don't swap or re-sell their material.
This message probably come too late though. Already most models would prefer to stay at home on webcam, partly because photographers can't raise enough paid interest in shooting them.
telfordmodelstudio@gmail.com
-
Ashton_Casey
- Posts: 1869
- Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2021 6:41 pm
Re: Amber Green and Chloe Sas
Top burny busty chicks only on this site! Follow the link, and you won?t be sorry! - https://bit.ly/3qJZS9X [img]https://img.prikolin.ru/uploads/posts/2 ... ot/506.jpg[/img]
-
Ashton_Casey
- Posts: 1869
- Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2021 6:41 pm
Re: Amber Green and Chloe Sas
Top burny busty chicks only on this site! Follow the link, and you won?t be sorry! - https://bit.ly/3qJZS9X [img]https://img.prikolin.ru/uploads/posts/2 ... ot/506.jpg[/img]
-
Ashton_Casey
- Posts: 1869
- Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2021 6:41 pm
Re: Amber Green and Chloe Sas
Top burny busty chicks only on this site! Follow the link, and you won?t be sorry! - https://bit.ly/3qJZS9X [img]https://img.prikolin.ru/uploads/posts/2 ... ot/506.jpg[/img]